This thread was originally titled, "Incredible development in the $612,000 Transcon Goodge run, currently ongoing" but the new title is more descriptive. The description of the run is here.
That's what you'd expect. You've actually just supported Will's argument. He is saying that the issue was with heart rates lower than this. Lower than expected.
Which Will are you talking about? I don't especially care about the heart rate numbers being posted. I do care about there being discrepancies between heart rate being published before and after scrutiny.
But less important than different start/finish positions, ridiculous paces running uphill at elevation and why no-one in his crew uploads runs.
That's what you'd expect. You've actually just supported Will's argument. He is saying that the issue was with heart rates lower than this. Lower than expected.
Hardly. Will C is claiming that wrist-based HR readings are 98-99% accurate. That is clearly utter nonsense as Jess' run clearly demonstrates. A chest reading would have no where near the variance that run shows. I imagine it was probably very stable around 125-135 for an athlete of her ability.
Just as a disclaimer and reading a little more from the other posters I do think this Goodge fella is pulling a fast one. The start and finish points being 3 miles apart is a huge red-flag so I am on Will C's side that this attempt is a farce but the HR data claims are a silly distraction.
But in the meantime he’s raising hundreds of thousands for charity so get behind him.
Please correct me if I'm missing something, but I am not sure how this fundraising thing works. Is he raising awareness about cancer of all things so that more people know about cancer? I would guess most adults know about cancer and that you can donate money to some charity claiming to fund research. Is him shuffling his legs with a crew of pals on a nice vacation/publicity stunt somehow supposed to inspire people to donate? I would guess most people who want to donate to charity would do so without such inspiration. So the way it is set up first GoFundMe gets it's 2.9% + $0.30 per transaction, then William and his crew gets expenses/salaries taken out, then the rest maybe goes to specific charity which then takes away their administration costs and then there's no way to know how much money actually makes it to the hungry researchers. I heard Amber Heard is also very charitable with other people's money :)
I share similar thoughts. As I posted yesterday, Willvc is an established name in the ultra-endurance game and I'm inclined to listen to his arguments... but we're getting so caught in the weeds on bloomin' wrist HR readings when there's so many other obvious shady things going down with this run.
Just because you're raising money for charity, doesnt mean you can just talk around the basics of data keeping for record attempts like this. Before any idiots that have forgotten to have their Nu Calm and Puresport mushrooms and CBD today respond to that, the side of the support van is making this claim. There's also clearly commercial agendas involved in this, that again should be subject to basic data keeping. If you want to claim that, you tick the basic boxes for record keeping. Same as Bruce Tulloh did decades before all the stupid supplements Goodge et al. are ramming down their throats.
We're well over a week into an audience asking basic data keeping records. The easist way for Goodge et al. to answer this is to stick the tracker on Will at all times (cant believe we're having to ask for that but alas), provide proof of where you're starting and ending your days, ditch the rediculous "code of conduct to run with Will. Then all of this goes away.
That's what you'd expect. You've actually just supported Will's argument. He is saying that the issue was with heart rates lower than this. Lower than expected.
Hardly. Will C is claiming that wrist-based HR readings are 98-99% accurate. That is clearly utter nonsense as Jess' run clearly demonstrates. A chest reading would have no where near the variance that run shows. I imagine it was probably very stable around 125-135 for an athlete of her ability.
Just as a disclaimer and reading a little more from the other posters I do think this Goodge fella is pulling a fast one. The start and finish points being 3 miles apart is a huge red-flag so I am on Will C's side that this attempt is a farce but the HR data claims are a silly distraction.
This isn't the concern.
To repeat my comment from #194:
"This is frustrating because the point's been made multiple times now. Refer to my post #175 for a v. succinct overview.
Heart rate tech could be 100% inaccurate, this isn't the primary issue. The issue is that inaccuracy is happening on a consistent basis ONLY during Goodge's three events over FOUR years, across multiple bits of tech (with multiple heart rate monitors & GPS), in the exact same, rather unique, way. These discrepancies haven't happened during any of his training runs, nor any of his witnessed runs.
The problem isn't just that it's faulty, it's WHEN it's faulty. This pattern needs to be explained.
Unless Will (the topic creator) is simply wrong.
I'm not saying that there isn't a perfectly reasonable explanation - a quirk of how his teams operate during these runs that explains it. But it needs to be explained.
If we're just going to go through pages of people talking about HR data being inaccurate or faulty HR monitors then this discussion is pointless, and we're all wasting our time."
If his HR data were simply failing you wouldn't expect to only see this particular pattern in this particular way, during particular days. Why aren't these HR reading issues happening (in this particular v. specific way) on any of his training runs? Why aren't they happening when Will C has put pressure on their camp to produce clean data? Why aren't they happening during witnessed runs during these same events?
Irregularities aren't the problem. The pattern & nature of irregularities are. He's frequently getting up in the morning, producing completely normal HR data, going for his afternoon nap and then SPEEDING UP whilst seeing a 25%+ reduction in heart-rate. This has happened across 3 different events on multiple continents, with multiple different bits of kit, across multiple years.
So either he's cheating, there's a quirk unique to how he performs these runs on days when people aren't around to witness him running that is leading to it, or Will C's presenting incorrect data.
That's what you'd expect. You've actually just supported Will's argument. He is saying that the issue was with heart rates lower than this. Lower than expected.
Hardly. Will C is claiming that wrist-based HR readings are 98-99% accurate. That is clearly utter nonsense.
I didn't read every post here, so I don't know if he actually claimed that outright or if you're inferring this. It did seem, though, that some of his points could possibly be true without claiming that wrist HR is largely accurate. I think the key to this is that he argued about the wrist-based HR anomalies: While the equipment can produce HR data with substantial (and multiple kinds of) inaccuracy, known inaccuracies don't seem to follow the pattern he has reported with this runner's data.
And I haven't looked closely enough to form a strong opinion on the legit/not question, but I'm hoping a number of runners take up the crew chief's offer of having people run with Goodge.
Unless he's really monitored by a team of skeptics 24/7, you can't dispel all their objections, but I think even more transparency and scrutiny would be welcomed by everyone regardless of opinion, because skeptics would want assurances and those who just cheer Goodge on would want the clear refutation of haters and the knowledge of the feat being performed without an asterisk.
Hardly. Will C is claiming that wrist-based HR readings are 98-99% accurate. That is clearly utter nonsense as Jess' run clearly demonstrates. A chest reading would have no where near the variance that run shows. I imagine it was probably very stable around 125-135 for an athlete of her ability.
Just as a disclaimer and reading a little more from the other posters I do think this Goodge fella is pulling a fast one. The start and finish points being 3 miles apart is a huge red-flag so I am on Will C's side that this attempt is a farce but the HR data claims are a silly distraction.
This isn't the concern.
To repeat my comment from #194:
"This is frustrating because the point's been made multiple times now. Refer to my post #175 for a v. succinct overview.
Heart rate tech could be 100% inaccurate, this isn't the primary issue. The issue is that inaccuracy is happening on a consistent basis ONLY during Goodge's three events over FOUR years, across multiple bits of tech (with multiple heart rate monitors & GPS), in the exact same, rather unique, way. These discrepancies haven't happened during any of his training runs, nor any of his witnessed runs.
The problem isn't just that it's faulty, it's WHEN it's faulty. This pattern needs to be explained.
Unless Will (the topic creator) is simply wrong.
I'm not saying that there isn't a perfectly reasonable explanation - a quirk of how his teams operate during these runs that explains it. But it needs to be explained.
If we're just going to go through pages of people talking about HR data being inaccurate or faulty HR monitors then this discussion is pointless, and we're all wasting our time."
If his HR data were simply failing you wouldn't expect to only see this particular pattern in this particular way, during particular days. Why aren't these HR reading issues happening (in this particular v. specific way) on any of his training runs? Why aren't they happening when Will C has put pressure on their camp to produce clean data? Why aren't they happening during witnessed runs during these same events?
Irregularities aren't the problem. The pattern & nature of irregularities are. He's frequently getting up in the morning, producing completely normal HR data, going for his afternoon nap and then SPEEDING UP whilst seeing a 25%+ reduction in heart-rate. This has happened across 3 different events on multiple continents, with multiple different bits of kit, across multiple years.
So either he's cheating, there's a quirk unique to how he performs these runs on days when people aren't around to witness him running that is leading to it, or Will C's presenting incorrect data.
Exactly this, plus the apparently different start/end data from some days and the "code of conduct DM" requested for people wanting to run with WG (presumably so they have a heads up that someone in coming to watch?).
Something is very, very off here and if it wasn't then by now the tracker would be on the runner and they would have put a chest strap on WG. If I was to attempt something of this magnitude, I'd be wearing two watches at all times and a tracker. It just doesn't stack up!!
We're well over a week into an audience asking basic data keeping records. The easist way for Goodge et al. to answer this is to stick the tracker on Will at all times (cant believe we're having to ask for that but alas), provide proof of where you're starting and ending your days, ditch the rediculous "code of conduct to run with Will. Then all of this goes away.
The heart rate thing is pretty sus (as in consistently questionable), but the most damning thing is the lack of evidence that he's actually running every mile. If you can afford a whole production crew, you can afford reliable tracking.
It's like they saw what went wrong for previous fake attempts; really clear tracking for people to dig in to, no barrier to keep away prying eyes, and decided to close those loose ends.
We can keep debating on here but boots on the ground is the way forward with this thread.
Exactly this, plus the apparently different start/end data from some days and the "code of conduct DM" requested for people wanting to run with WG (presumably so they have a heads up that someone in coming to watch?).
It's the reluctance to admit that their tracking has been less than ideal and that they haven't come out and said "hey all you negative vibers, we shouldn't have to do this, but the tracker is now on Will, he's got a chest strap and if you want to show up, you know where we are", that makes me worry. I can see both sides, but if you're being criticised, at least try to work out why and see if there's something you can do to stop that. Budget shouldn't be an issue, just "borrow" some more out of that GoFundMe... Some transparency on that would be welcome. There are platforms you can use that allow you to donate to multiple charities without, or with smaller fees than GoFundMe, so even if they were naive on this, they should change tack on that and make sure EVERY cent goes to charity. They'll definitely be reading this with RB on crew so if they don't change the above, at least some misleading appropriation of funds is going on. Maybe more.
We're well over a week into an audience asking basic data keeping records. The easist way for Goodge et al. to answer this is to stick the tracker on Will at all times (cant believe we're having to ask for that but alas), provide proof of where you're starting and ending your days, ditch the rediculous "code of conduct to run with Will. Then all of this goes away.
The heart rate thing is pretty sus (as in consistently questionable), but the most damning thing is the lack of evidence that he's actually running every mile. If you can afford a whole production crew, you can afford reliable tracking.
Soon: If we had to buy reliable tracking equipment, that's less money we'd be able to give to cancer charity! What are you, pro-cancer?! Gremlin.
People keep mentioning the more normal HR data since WVC put pressure on them. It should be noted though that this occurred the same time as the change of watch. Since using the Coros, the average HR has been around the more expected 130. I initially discounted any Nucalm effect but, having read up about it, it does seem to pretty widely respected. I haven’t looked into it enough but it could potentially be a factor in how the second half of each day looks.
People keep mentioning the more normal HR data since WVC put pressure on them. It should be noted though that this occurred the same time as the change of watch. Since using the Coros, the average HR has been around the more expected 130. I initially discounted any Nucalm effect but, having read up about it, it does seem to pretty widely respected. I haven’t looked into it enough but it could potentially be a factor in how the second half of each day looks.
agreed on the watch, the new one seems to work better. he may well be legit.
don't be so credulous about the rubbish he's shilling though, nucalm is obviously bollocks.
ANYWAY, MORE IMPORTANTLY
will cockerell is flying out to investigate. fantastic commitment to our entertainment, what a treat!